Abstract

This corpus-based study aimed at investigating Concluding Transition Signals’ (CTS) frequency, functions, and grammatical formula within the academic texts. Accordingly, nine CTSs were taken based on thetaxonomy described in the introduction section. Then, 400 different samples of CTSs were selected and analyzed within the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) both qualitatively and quantitatively. Findings revealed that the frequency of concluding terms were varied based on both the nature of the CTSs and the genre in which they were employed. The first three most widely used CTSs were “thus,” “finally” and “in short” with a high frequency of occurrence in “Geography” and “Social Sciences” genres. Moreover, the analysis indicated that these nine terms can have diverse textual functions from which “summarizing of the paper’s main points,” “suggesting the results or consequences” and “evoking a vivid image of the discussion” were the most prevailing ones. Furthermore, the results implied that CTSs were mostly used in the initial position of the main clause rather than within the subordinate clauses. Comparing to subordinate or relative clauses coming after the concluding terms, main clauses are also preferred to be used by the authors. The study includes some extracts from the academic texts and provides implications regarding the academic writing instructions.

摘要

这项基于语料库的研究旨在研究学术文献中结论性过渡信号（CTS）的频率，功能和语法公式。因此，根据介绍部分中描述的分类法获取了9个CTS。然后，选择了400种不同的CTS样本，并在美国当代英语语料库（COCA）中进行了定性和定量分析。调查结果表明，结论词的频率根据CTS的性质和使用它们的体裁而变化。前三个使用最广泛的CTS是“因此”，“最终”和“简短”，在“地理”和“社会科学”类型中出现的频率很高。此外，分析表明，这9个术语可以具有多种文本功能，其中“总结论文要点，“建议结果或结果”和“引起讨论的生动印象”是最普遍的。此外，结果表明，CTS主要用于主要子句的初始位置，而不是用于从属子句。与结论条款之后的从属或相对从句相比，作者更喜欢使用主从句。该研究包括一些学术文章的摘录，并提供了有关学术写作指导的启示。与结论条款之后的从属或相对从句相比，作者更喜欢使用主从句。该研究包括一些学术文章的摘录，并提供了有关学术写作指导的启示。与结论条款之后的从属或相对从句相比，作者更喜欢使用主从句。该研究包括一些学术文章的摘录，并提供了有关学术写作指导的启示。